Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-30 Thread Richard Heck
On 03/29/2014 04:43 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Richard Heck schreef op 28-3-2014 16:53: I think this one that you had earlier: new -> fixed in master -> fixed in master and stable -> closed(fixed) new -> fixed in stable -> closed(fixed) new -> fixed in stable -> fixed in master and sta

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-29 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
Richard Heck schreef op 28-3-2014 16:53: I think this one that you had earlier: new -> fixed in master -> fixed in master and stable -> closed(fixed) new -> fixed in stable -> closed(fixed) new -> fixed in stable -> fixed in master and stable -> closed(fixed) new -> fixed in master -> closed(f

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Richard Heck
On 03/28/2014 06:40 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller > wrote: 2014-03-28 10:56 GMT+01:00 Vincent van Ravesteijn: Do you prefer workflow as: new -> fixed in master -> fixed in master and stable ->

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > 2014-03-28 10:56 GMT+01:00 Vincent van Ravesteijn: > > Do you prefer workflow as: >> >> new -> fixed in master -> fixed in master and stable -> closed(fixed) >> >> new -> fixed in stable -> closed(fixed) >> >> new -> fixed in stable ->

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
2014-03-28 10:56 GMT+01:00 Vincent van Ravesteijn: > Do you prefer workflow as: > > new -> fixed in master -> fixed in master and stable -> closed(fixed) > > new -> fixed in stable -> closed(fixed) > > new -> fixed in stable -> fixed in master and stable -> closed(fixed) > > new -> fixed in master

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > 2014-03-28 8:57 GMT+01:00 Vincent van Ravesteijn : > > I implied if something is fixedinbranch it is either also fixedintrunk (or >> it was never in trunk). >> > > However, "fixed in trunk" implies to me that the bug _was_ in trunk. I >

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:38 AM, JeanMarc Lasgouttes wrote: > Is itvpossible to have human-readable names like "Fixed in Master" ? > > JMarc > The status probably can't have spaces: new, closed, accepted, fixedinmaster, fixedinstable. The text describing the action to switch between statuses can

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread JeanMarc Lasgouttes
Is itvpossible to have human-readable names like "Fixed in Master" ? JMarc On 28 mars 2014 08:44:43 UTC+01:00, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> >> I thought about doing this a while ago. It would be a lot more >useful. We >> also might change these to something like "fixedindevel" and >> "fixedi

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
2014-03-28 8:57 GMT+01:00 Vincent van Ravesteijn : > I implied if something is fixedinbranch it is either also fixedintrunk (or > it was never in trunk). > However, "fixed in trunk" implies to me that the bug _was_ in trunk. I think it makes more sense for a branch-only bug to tag it "fixedinbran

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Richard Heck wrote: > On 03/27/2014 07:37 PM, Richard Heck wrote: > >> On 03/27/2014 07:15 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Do we want to setup the fixedinbranch, and fixedintrunk status for >>> tickets. This means, we don't have to work

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-28 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
> > I thought about doing this a while ago. It would be a lot more useful. We > also might change these to something like "fixedindevel" and > "fixedinstable". The trunk/branch language is a leftover from SVN and is > confusing to newer folks. > If we can agree on proper names. "fixedinmaster", "f

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-27 Thread Benjamin Piwowarski
> Le 28 mars 2014 à 00:37, Richard Heck a écrit : > >> On 03/27/2014 07:15 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Do we want to setup the fixedinbranch, and fixedintrunk status for tickets. >> This means, we don't have to work with the keywords any longer. Then, you >> will hav

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-27 Thread Uwe Stöhr
Am 28.03.2014 00:15, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: And we can also have more meaningful roadmap overviews. I implemented this locally, so it is really possible to do. Shall we investigate further ? +1 regards Uwe

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-27 Thread Richard Heck
On 03/27/2014 07:37 PM, Richard Heck wrote: On 03/27/2014 07:15 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Hi all, Do we want to setup the fixedinbranch, and fixedintrunk status for tickets. This means, we don't have to work with the keywords any longer. Then, you will have the following actions:

Re: Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-27 Thread Richard Heck
On 03/27/2014 07:15 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Hi all, Do we want to setup the fixedinbranch, and fixedintrunk status for tickets. This means, we don't have to work with the keywords any longer. Then, you will have the following actions: And we can also have more meaningful roadmap

Trac: fixedinbranch, fixedintrunk ticket status

2014-03-27 Thread Vincent van Ravesteijn
Hi all, Do we want to setup  the fixedinbranch, and fixedintrunk status for tickets. This means, we don't have to work with the keywords any longer. Then, you will have the following actions: And we can also have more meaningful roadmap overviews.